The only way I would play another Everquest game is if they took the best features from the older titles, and maybe some from Vanguard like Diplomacy, and made a sandbox out of it. The world has had enough end-game grinders I think. Massively vertical gear progression is not necessary for mmorpgs. Grinding endlessly to get better gear that we can't do anything with but raid some more is not the most fun thing we can ever do in mmorpgs.
Roleplayinn.com - New forum for people who love role-playing of all kinds - tabletop/pencil & paper, live-action, and role-playing in mmorpgs.
Pantheon is on the horizon, leave Vanguard to rest in peace.
And from the looks of it, it will have a similar community. So long for its long term chances...
It's correct that Pantheon aims at the same demographics, but your conclusion is too superficial.
Probably you never played or got involved with the Vanguard drama, but I can guarantee that its design wasn't the problem. Vanguard was a bloody mess from start to finish.
Microsoft cut the funding half way through the project and left Sigil Games with no money to finish the game, for months the game had no publisher before SoE finally decided to team up with Sigil. After only 6 months they released the game without investing any money in it. The game at launch was literally unplayable for 90% of PCs, I even bought a new rig to run Vanguard but with no avail, it was literally a bug fuckfest with zero optimization and a lot of content still missing. It took 2 years of snail pace improvements to make Vanguard finally playable, by that time there was no community left. Too little too late.
Plus SoE never released any new content (while still releasing yearly expansions for EQ and EQ2), they hardly advertised the game, they could even relaunched the game, but they did none of that. SoE wanted Vanguard to die as it was in direct competition with EQ and EQ2, they kept it alive as long there were few bucks to be made, then they just killed it.
Pantheon is on the horizon, leave Vanguard to rest in peace.
And from the looks of it, it will have a similar community. So long for its long term chances...
It's correct that Pantheon aims at the same demographics, but your conclusion is too superficial.
Probably you never played or got involved with the Vanguard drama, but I can guarantee that its design wasn't the problem. Vanguard was a bloody mess from start to finish.
Microsoft cut the funding half way through the project and left Sigil Games with no money to finish the game, for months the game had no publisher before SoE finally decided to team up with Sigil. After only 6 months they released the game without investing any money in it. The game at launch was literally unplayable for 90% of PCs, I even bought a new rig to run Vanguard but with no avail, it was literally a bug fuckfest with zero optimization and a lot of content still missing. It took 2 years of snail pace improvements to make Vanguard finally playable, by that time there was no community left. Too little too late.
Plus SoE never released any new content (while still releasing yearly expansions for EQ and EQ2), they hardly advertised the game, they could even relaunched the game, but they did none of that. SoE wanted Vanguard to die as it was in direct competition with EQ and EQ2, they kept it alive as long there were few bucks to be made, then they just killed it.
Saying Microsoft cut funding halfway through and left Sigil with no money is incorrect. Microsoft cut ties after 4 years, why is only really known by Microsoft and Sigil, but at the time, it was rumoured that Sigil were way behind schedule and required more money to continue development.
If Sigil had no money, how did they purchase the rights back from Microsoft? and saying they had no publisher for months is a stretch, when they announced that they had purchased the rights, they announced the co-publishing deal with SOE at the same time.
SOE only secured a deal to co-publish the game roughly a year before it launched, so how much money should they have invested at that time? How much did they invest? SOE did not buy the game until months after launch, and if SOE really wanted the game to die, why did they help Sigil by co-publishing? why did they buy the game after the shit show that was the launch?
Before tinfoil hat wearers come back with "they did it so nobody else would have it as competition against X game", who else was around at that time that could, or would, co-publish, or buy the game and publish it outright?
At the end of the day, all the problems with V:SoH were caused by Sigil, nobody else.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
McQuaid: Right. When Smed came to me and said, "I know you need 12 months, Brad, but I can only give you six," I believed him because he's a friend. They did the best they could with the money they could put into it. It's a travesty that they couldn't put more into it so we could release it later, but I have no ill will towards Sony at all. In fact, it's quite the opposite. I'm super happy that they were even able to come in and do what they did. We were at least able to get the game out the door. If it wasn't for Sony and Smed, the game would never have even launched. Despite the problems, they came to our rescue. I will always remain grateful for that.
I really liked Vanguard for what it was trying to be. But the performance was so bad and there were a ridiculous amount of bugs. I played for a couple of months from the moment it was released. Came back later after it became Sony's toy. Sigil tried, but wasn't able to fix the bugs and when Sony bought it, they never fixed anything either, they were just milking it for the crappy and buggy mess that it was.
Vanguard should act as a warning about how not to release a unfinished (sure world was big, but the empty areas!) and unoptimized MMO (why not add weather to make the already bad performance even worse ).
It's completely untrue that SOE did not improve the game . Anyone who played it from beta to launch and on will be able to see with their own eyes how they game had improved. It was at least playable and relatively less buggy then what it was like during the beta and launch. If SOE did not do any improvements why was there a noticeable difference. I mean it is fine to simply demonize SOE but not everyone is blind.
I suspect whatever EQ3 is, when it's announced, it might be a back to the basics approach. I can hope, anyway. They're building it, as they'd be stupid not to, but what shape it takes compared to the direction of EQN is entirely up in the air.
You think Daybreak Games is capable of building a new MMO from the ground up, and not have it be a total disaster? If so, we have very different opinions of the company.
They're hiring over 30 new positions, so they're building a new team for "something". I suspect it's EQ related.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
At the end of the day, all the problems with V:SoH were caused by Sigil, nobody else.
Agreed. And who was "Sigil"? Brad, the same guy who is now making Pantheon. I'm inclined to believe that people like Brad do not learn from their mistakes. Let's all hope that I'm wrong.
It's incredibly naive to believe Brad hasn't learnt any lesson's from Vanguard, people seem to really like to bash him. He had one failure, yeah it was big, but at the end of the day they managed to get the game out. Also he's had a massive success with Everquest, balance in all things is good.
This time round they are using the Unity engine for the game, not trying to use the Unreal engine and make it work as an MMO engine. If this was someone like Chris Roberts with a track record across multiple titles, then yeah I'd be critical, hell you have to be sceptical, that you'll get even half of what he's promised. But due to the scope of Brad's current project and what he's shown so far I think it's on track.
Brad isn't another Peter Molyneux, making promises and failing to deliver, you only have to watch the gameplay videos to see how the development is moving along in a positive way.
Ultimately will it be a success? Well that I can't answer, the MMO market is pretty fickle, people are fickle, I'd like to see it succeed, the same way I'd like to see Star Citizen succeed, I think it would be healthy for the genre to have a modern interpretation of the older style of MMO.
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
I'd play Vanguard again if they brought it back. Those classes were fun as heck and the world was HUGE.
How much could it possibly cost DBG for one server? They could make it BTP for new players and maybe a $4.99 sub for old players for a couple months.
I really enjoyed the classes in Vanguard as well. I think the classes and the group resource gathering mechanic were my two favorite things.
The only reason I stopped playing was because something new came out. And stopped playing that because something new came out. And stopped playing that because something new came out. And... It's a never-ending cycle.
Brad isn't another Peter Molyneux, making promises and failing to deliver, you only have to watch the gameplay videos to see how the development is moving along in a positive way.
There were a lot of awesome gameplay videos for Vanguard too. They kept you drooling for more... until you finally installed the game on your computer and the reality wasn't that nice at all.
I disagree, for all it's faults Vanguard was a good game, I enjoyed my time playing it, I find the videos done for Pantheon don't try and dress up the game, they show you real alpha play rather than an idealised version.
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
Why not urge daybreak to sell the IP to another company that are willing to bring it back from the grave.
What company would buy?
Do you want to put it your own money to buy this IP (which most gamers don't know or care) and then throw more good money to fix the game, set up the server, ramp up customer service and re-release it?
I disagree, for all it's faults Vanguard was a good game
lol "all it's faults" and "was a good game"? Contradiction, uh? Or you have a really loosely definition of what "good" means.
Unfortunately the gaming world is not so forgiving.
Just because something isn't perfect, doesn't mean it can't be good, if we all lived for the perfect game none of us would be playing any.
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
I disagree, for all it's faults Vanguard was a good game
lol "all it's faults" and "was a good game"? Contradiction, uh? Or you have a really loosely definition of what "good" means.
Unfortunately the gaming world is not so forgiving.
Just because something isn't perfect, doesn't mean it can't be good, if we all lived for the perfect game none of us would be playing any.
I agree, while V:SoH was a mess at launch, and saying it was buggy is a mild way of putting it, playing the game was fun for the most part. The amount of races, and available class's, all the different starter area's, exploring, dungeon's, some of the quest's, went a long way to making you forget the crap for a while.
Will never forget sticking a Dwarf in a sack and throwing them off a bridge to drown, one of the funniest quest's I have ever done.
In a way, V:SoH was a lot like SWG (which was also a buggy mess, but lots of fun), the whole was greater than the sum of its parts.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Did people not see what happened with EQNext and Landmark?
They cancelled EQNext with no refunds and put Landmark on steam only to shut it down. That happened, right?
I'd link to a youtube video of them adding stuff to the cash shop in Landmark but they deleted all the videos from both Landmark and EQNext channels.
This company is garbage you would be better off with some volunteer emulator team.
Also if Pantheon is able to incorporate some of the better design elements from VG (like classes) it will be better for it.
That said I also think Pantheon will be better than Vanguard. Since they have that experience to pull from.
No the company was smart, as it was obvious neither idea was going anywhere. You're blaming a new company under new management for bleeding out it's problematic waste, Smed included. DBG hasn't done anything development related to say one way or the other how it would fare.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Did people not see what happened with EQNext and Landmark?
They cancelled EQNext with no refunds and put Landmark on steam only to shut it down. That happened, right?
I'd link to a youtube video of them adding stuff to the cash shop in Landmark but they deleted all the videos from both Landmark and EQNext channels.
This company is garbage you would be better off with some volunteer emulator team.
Also if Pantheon is able to incorporate some of the better design elements from VG (like classes) it will be better for it.
That said I also think Pantheon will be better than Vanguard. Since they have that experience to pull from.
No the company was smart, as it was obvious neither idea was going anywhere. You're blaming a new company under new management for bleeding out it's problematic waste, Smed included. DBG hasn't done anything development related to say one way or the other how it would fare.
I don't totally agree with that. Yes, Landmark could not work in that form. They could have made it work as a smooth voxel Minecraft version though.
EQNext, though... I think that game would have worked. Based on everything said, the game was taking the best from EQ clones and from sandboxes like UO, and mixed it together along with some tasty new ingredients.
EQNext died the day they fired Dave first and then later the Math guy I don't remember the name of right now. They removed the spirit and the engine. There was nothing left.
I still don't understand why they fired Dave Georgeson. Not only he was good at his job, he had a clear vision of what the game would be, but he had 1000% more charisma than that stupid girlish community manager they kept for a while after his departure. I guess they couldn't afford his pay anymore... so they fired all the good persons to only keep the mediocre and bad ones. And the few decent ones who survived all left now too.
Worked and being within the budget or expectations of those who purchased SOE are two different things. Could they have worked? Sure, that doesn't say much about what the investment firm saw after acquiring those projects though. If they saw a strong development environment with a sound path to success.. there would be little reason to gut those teams or their projects. At least IMO.
If they wanted a fast turn over on their investment they could have sold those assets off but they didn't. They're still holding on to them, for what is anyone's guess.
I just don't think it's fair to blame a new company for the failings of the teams they acquired in an acquisition of this sort. Lets not forget EQ "3" saw many iterations and was in a constant flux under SOE, Landmark was essentially the same story. That doesn't speak well to their "vision". It kinda sounds like a money pit best left unfilled to me.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Did people not see what happened with EQNext and Landmark?
They cancelled EQNext with no refunds and put Landmark on steam only to shut it down. That happened, right?
I'd link to a youtube video of them adding stuff to the cash shop in Landmark but they deleted all the videos from both Landmark and EQNext channels.
This company is garbage you would be better off with some volunteer emulator team.
Also if Pantheon is able to incorporate some of the better design elements from VG (like classes) it will be better for it.
That said I also think Pantheon will be better than Vanguard. Since they have that experience to pull from.
No the company was smart, as it was obvious neither idea was going anywhere. You're blaming a new company under new management for bleeding out it's problematic waste, Smed included. DBG hasn't done anything development related to say one way or the other how it would fare.
I don't totally agree with that. Yes, Landmark could not work in that form. They could have made it work as a smooth voxel Minecraft version though.
EQNext, though... I think that game would have worked. Based on everything said, the game was taking the best from EQ clones and from sandboxes like UO, and mixed it together along with some tasty new ingredients.
EQNext died the day they fired Dave first and then later the Math guy I don't remember the name of right now. They removed the spirit and the engine. There was nothing left.
I still don't understand why they fired Dave Georgeson. Not only he was good at his job, he had a clear vision of what the game would be, but he had 1000% more charisma than that stupid girlish community manager they kept for a while after his departure. I guess they couldn't afford his pay anymore... so they fired all the good persons to only keep the mediocre and bad ones. And the few decent ones who survived all left now too.
Worked and being within the budget or expectations of those who purchased SOE are two different things. Could they have worked? Sure, that doesn't say much about what the investment firm saw after acquiring those projects though. If they saw a strong development environment with a sound path to success.. there would be little reason to gut those teams or their projects. At least IMO.
If they wanted a fast turn over on their investment they could have sold those assets off but they didn't. They're still holding on to them, for what is anyone's guess.
I just don't think it's fair to blame a new company for the failings of the teams they acquired in an acquisition of this sort. Lets not forget EQ "3" saw many iterations and was in a constant flux under SOE, Landmark was essentially the same story. That doesn't speak well to their "vision". It kinda sounds like a money pit best left unfilled to me.
Well, Blizzard was able to recover from the cancellation of "Project Titan", reused the assets and engine, and turned them into what is according to most reviews and the gaming scene one of the best shooters ever released.
Sadly, "They Break Games" (sorry, they will be that for me until they prove me wrong) don't have the kind of money and development power Blizzard has. But if they can turn Landmark+EQNext into something that ends being a good voxel based multiplayer game, I'm all for it.
Not holding my breath though.
"That doesn't speak well to their "vision". It kinda sounds like a money pit best left unfilled to me."
Dave Georgeson knew exactly what kind of game he wanted to make, as proved in the many interviews and videos about EQNext. His focus was clear, and he was able to detail every part of the game. Sony and "They Break" may have found it too ambitious, but I still like the vision of that guy today. I'd have played that game.
EQN was my ultimate dream come true, of course they cancelled it. Still gutted.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Did people not see what happened with EQNext and Landmark?
They cancelled EQNext with no refunds and put Landmark on steam only to shut it down. That happened, right?
I'd link to a youtube video of them adding stuff to the cash shop in Landmark but they deleted all the videos from both Landmark and EQNext channels.
This company is garbage you would be better off with some volunteer emulator team.
Also if Pantheon is able to incorporate some of the better design elements from VG (like classes) it will be better for it.
That said I also think Pantheon will be better than Vanguard. Since they have that experience to pull from.
No the company was smart, as it was obvious neither idea was going anywhere. You're blaming a new company under new management for bleeding out it's problematic waste, Smed included. DBG hasn't done anything development related to say one way or the other how it would fare.
I don't totally agree with that. Yes, Landmark could not work in that form. They could have made it work as a smooth voxel Minecraft version though.
EQNext, though... I think that game would have worked. Based on everything said, the game was taking the best from EQ clones and from sandboxes like UO, and mixed it together along with some tasty new ingredients.
EQNext died the day they fired Dave first and then later the Math guy I don't remember the name of right now. They removed the spirit and the engine. There was nothing left.
I still don't understand why they fired Dave Georgeson. Not only he was good at his job, he had a clear vision of what the game would be, but he had 1000% more charisma than that stupid girlish community manager they kept for a while after his departure. I guess they couldn't afford his pay anymore... so they fired all the good persons to only keep the mediocre and bad ones. And the few decent ones who survived all left now too.
Worked and being within the budget or expectations of those who purchased SOE are two different things. Could they have worked? Sure, that doesn't say much about what the investment firm saw after acquiring those projects though. If they saw a strong development environment with a sound path to success.. there would be little reason to gut those teams or their projects. At least IMO.
If they wanted a fast turn over on their investment they could have sold those assets off but they didn't. They're still holding on to them, for what is anyone's guess.
I just don't think it's fair to blame a new company for the failings of the teams they acquired in an acquisition of this sort. Lets not forget EQ "3" saw many iterations and was in a constant flux under SOE, Landmark was essentially the same story. That doesn't speak well to their "vision". It kinda sounds like a money pit best left unfilled to me.
Well, Blizzard was able to recover from the cancellation of "Project Titan", reused the assets and engine, and turned them into what is according to most reviews and the gaming scene one of the best shooters ever released.
Sadly, "They Break Games" (sorry, they will be that for me until they prove me wrong) don't have the kind of money and development power Blizzard has. But if they can turn Landmark+EQNext into something that ends being a good voxel based multiplayer game, I'm all for it.
Not holding my breath though.
"That doesn't speak well to their "vision". It kinda sounds like a money pit best left unfilled to me."
Dave Georgeson knew exactly what kind of game he wanted to make, as proved in the many interviews and videos about EQNext. His focus was clear, and he was able to detail every part of the game. Sony and "They Break" may have found it too ambitious, but I still like the vision of that guy today. I'd have played that game.
EQN was my ultimate dream come true, of course they cancelled it. Still gutted.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Forget which year it was, but they had EQN at Gamescom, and it looked pretty good, looked to be further along development wise than it turned out to be.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Since EQ!! is still running, and still being updated with content that must be paid for, I doubt it is on life support, and is certainly more viable than a game that couldn't justify continued operation when even the original EQ is still worth running for them.
To think that enough players would be willing to pay a top range subscription fee for a game that couldn't bring enough players in with what is a more attractive pricing model these days is an expectation that is simply not realistic.
Sure, it would nice for Vanguard to come back, but Daybreak isn't going to do it, especially as a subscription only title, when only a couple of games with much larger player bases that it could hope to draw can manage it.
Perhaps a smaller company with lower revenue expectations willing to run what would be a very niche title with limited market appeal might feel it worthwhile. How many MMORPG companies are like that, though.
Did people not see what happened with EQNext and Landmark?
They cancelled EQNext with no refunds and put Landmark on steam only to shut it down. That happened, right?
I'd link to a youtube video of them adding stuff to the cash shop in Landmark but they deleted all the videos from both Landmark and EQNext channels.
This company is garbage you would be better off with some volunteer emulator team.
Also if Pantheon is able to incorporate some of the better design elements from VG (like classes) it will be better for it.
That said I also think Pantheon will be better than Vanguard. Since they have that experience to pull from.
No the company was smart, as it was obvious neither idea was going anywhere. You're blaming a new company under new management for bleeding out it's problematic waste, Smed included. DBG hasn't done anything development related to say one way or the other how it would fare.
I don't totally agree with that. Yes, Landmark could not work in that form. They could have made it work as a smooth voxel Minecraft version though.
EQNext, though... I think that game would have worked. Based on everything said, the game was taking the best from EQ clones and from sandboxes like UO, and mixed it together along with some tasty new ingredients.
EQNext died the day they fired Dave first and then later the Math guy I don't remember the name of right now. They removed the spirit and the engine. There was nothing left.
I still don't understand why they fired Dave Georgeson. Not only he was good at his job, he had a clear vision of what the game would be, but he had 1000% more charisma than that stupid girlish community manager they kept for a while after his departure. I guess they couldn't afford his pay anymore... so they fired all the good persons to only keep the mediocre and bad ones. And the few decent ones who survived all left now too.
Worked and being within the budget or expectations of those who purchased SOE are two different things. Could they have worked? Sure, that doesn't say much about what the investment firm saw after acquiring those projects though. If they saw a strong development environment with a sound path to success.. there would be little reason to gut those teams or their projects. At least IMO.
If they wanted a fast turn over on their investment they could have sold those assets off but they didn't. They're still holding on to them, for what is anyone's guess.
I just don't think it's fair to blame a new company for the failings of the teams they acquired in an acquisition of this sort. Lets not forget EQ "3" saw many iterations and was in a constant flux under SOE, Landmark was essentially the same story. That doesn't speak well to their "vision". It kinda sounds like a money pit best left unfilled to me.
Well, Blizzard was able to recover from the cancellation of "Project Titan", reused the assets and engine, and turned them into what is according to most reviews and the gaming scene one of the best shooters ever released.
Sadly, "They Break Games" (sorry, they will be that for me until they prove me wrong) don't have the kind of money and development power Blizzard has. But if they can turn Landmark+EQNext into something that ends being a good voxel based multiplayer game, I'm all for it.
Not holding my breath though.
"That doesn't speak well to their "vision". It kinda sounds like a money pit best left unfilled to me."
Dave Georgeson knew exactly what kind of game he wanted to make, as proved in the many interviews and videos about EQNext. His focus was clear, and he was able to detail every part of the game. Sony and "They Break" may have found it too ambitious, but I still like the vision of that guy today. I'd have played that game.
EQN was my ultimate dream come true, of course they cancelled it. Still gutted.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Forget which year it was, but they had EQN at Gamescom, and it looked pretty good, looked to be further along development wise than it turned out to be.
To be honest, I don't think that was the case. I think they had quality stuff and quite a bit of it. I do however think DBG thought it too risky and too expensive a project to continue. I can't blame them, the MMORPG landscape was already changing significantly. They looked at it from the business point of view and decided to cut their losses. Still gutted but I can't blame them, I might have done the same if it was my money on the line. Still, what they had and their ideas were a thing of beauty, I thought it looked stellar and the foundation was excellent as were their ideas, it was very, very costly though.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I've really no need to see Vanguard again. It's old, a long-dead relic of the past. There's no real substantial clamor to see and play Vanguard again.
But I can see a revival as a useful thing for DBG.
DBG has recently invested in assembling a new development team. DBG's current staff is all in maintenance mode, with little recent experience in game development. It may be plausible that DBG could use resurrecting an old project, one with known problems, and use this to 'train' a new core of developers in how DBG wants to develop future games. Essentially, they could use a retired product like Vanguard (or Free Realms) as a training ground to build a team to work the the way they want. Such a project could possibly ramp up a new team in a short time using a lot of existing assets (code, art, music, etc.).
I don't know that DBG would actually do this, however. I feel that there's just not enough money in a Vanguard revival to justify the development expenses. It makes more sense to me for DBG to look to sell off their retired IPs than revive them. That approach would give them short term income without incurring longer term liabilities, and that seems to fit their business strategy perfectly.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
It may be plausible that DBG could use resurrecting an old project, one with known problems, and use this to 'train' a new core of developers in how DBG wants to develop future games. Essentially, they could use a retired product like Vanguard (or Free Realms) as a training ground to build a team to work the the way they want.
Aye, they could use those projects to teach the new team how NOT to do things, perhaps... ?
It could also be counter-productive, though. If it was that easy to simply pick up a game and make an example of it, then I'm sure someone would have picked up the rights to Project Copernicus by now and we'd have played it and grown tired of it
Sometimes it's more work to pick up a project than just kill it.
It may be plausible that DBG could use resurrecting an old project, one with known problems, and use this to 'train' a new core of developers in how DBG wants to develop future games. Essentially, they could use a retired product like Vanguard (or Free Realms) as a training ground to build a team to work the the way they want.
Aye, they could use those projects to teach the new team how NOT to do things, perhaps... ?
It could also be counter-productive, though. If it was that easy to simply pick up a game and make an example of it, then I'm sure someone would have picked up the rights to Project Copernicus by now and we'd have played it and grown tired of it
Sometimes it's more work to pick up a project than just kill it.
Comments
Probably you never played or got involved with the Vanguard drama, but I can guarantee that its design wasn't the problem.
Vanguard was a bloody mess from start to finish.
Microsoft cut the funding half way through the project and left Sigil Games with no money to finish the game, for months the game had no publisher before SoE finally decided to team up with Sigil.
After only 6 months they released the game without investing any money in it.
The game at launch was literally unplayable for 90% of PCs, I even bought a new rig to run Vanguard but with no avail, it was literally a bug fuckfest with zero optimization and a lot of content still missing.
It took 2 years of snail pace improvements to make Vanguard finally playable, by that time there was no community left.
Too little too late.
Plus SoE never released any new content (while still releasing yearly expansions for EQ and EQ2), they hardly advertised the game, they could even relaunched the game, but they did none of that.
SoE wanted Vanguard to die as it was in direct competition with EQ and EQ2, they kept it alive as long there were few bucks to be made, then they just killed it.
How much could it possibly cost DBG for one server? They could make it BTP for new players and maybe a $4.99 sub for old players for a couple months.
Microsoft cut ties after 4 years, why is only really known by Microsoft and Sigil, but at the time, it was rumoured that Sigil were way behind schedule and required more money to continue development.
If Sigil had no money, how did they purchase the rights back from Microsoft? and saying they had no publisher for months is a stretch, when they announced that they had purchased the rights, they announced the co-publishing deal with SOE at the same time.
SOE only secured a deal to co-publish the game roughly a year before it launched, so how much money should they have invested at that time? How much did they invest?
SOE did not buy the game until months after launch, and if SOE really wanted the game to die, why did they help Sigil by co-publishing? why did they buy the game after the shit show that was the launch?
Before tinfoil hat wearers come back with "they did it so nobody else would have it as competition against X game", who else was around at that time that could, or would, co-publish, or buy the game and publish it outright?
At the end of the day, all the problems with V:SoH were caused by Sigil, nobody else.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
McQuaid: Right. When Smed came to me and said, "I know you need 12 months, Brad, but I can only give you six," I believed him because he's a friend. They did the best they could with the money they could put into it. It's a travesty that they couldn't put more into it so we could release it later, but I have no ill will towards Sony at all. In fact, it's quite the opposite. I'm super happy that they were even able to come in and do what they did. We were at least able to get the game out the door. If it wasn't for Sony and Smed, the game would never have even launched. Despite the problems, they came to our rescue. I will always remain grateful for that.
Vanguard should act as a warning about how not to release a unfinished (sure world was big, but the empty areas!) and unoptimized MMO (why not add weather to make the already bad performance even worse
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
This time round they are using the Unity engine for the game, not trying to use the Unreal engine and make it work as an MMO engine. If this was someone like Chris Roberts with a track record across multiple titles, then yeah I'd be critical, hell you have to be sceptical, that you'll get even half of what he's promised. But due to the scope of Brad's current project and what he's shown so far I think it's on track.
Brad isn't another Peter Molyneux, making promises and failing to deliver, you only have to watch the gameplay videos to see how the development is moving along in a positive way.
Ultimately will it be a success? Well that I can't answer, the MMO market is pretty fickle, people are fickle, I'd like to see it succeed, the same way I'd like to see Star Citizen succeed, I think it would be healthy for the genre to have a modern interpretation of the older style of MMO.
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
The only reason I stopped playing was because something new came out. And stopped playing that because something new came out. And stopped playing that because something new came out. And... It's a never-ending cycle.
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
Do you want to put it your own money to buy this IP (which most gamers don't know or care) and then throw more good money to fix the game, set up the server, ramp up customer service and re-release it?
Unfortunately the gaming world is not so forgiving.
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
The amount of races, and available class's, all the different starter area's, exploring, dungeon's, some of the quest's, went a long way to making you forget the crap for a while.
Will never forget sticking a Dwarf in a sack and throwing them off a bridge to drown, one of the funniest quest's I have ever done.
In a way, V:SoH was a lot like SWG (which was also a buggy mess, but lots of fun), the whole was greater than the sum of its parts.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
If they wanted a fast turn over on their investment they could have sold those assets off but they didn't. They're still holding on to them, for what is anyone's guess.
I just don't think it's fair to blame a new company for the failings of the teams they acquired in an acquisition of this sort. Lets not forget EQ "3" saw many iterations and was in a constant flux under SOE, Landmark was essentially the same story. That doesn't speak well to their "vision". It kinda sounds like a money pit best left unfilled to me.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
To think that enough players would be willing to pay a top range subscription fee for a game that couldn't bring enough players in with what is a more attractive pricing model these days is an expectation that is simply not realistic.
Sure, it would nice for Vanguard to come back, but Daybreak isn't going to do it, especially as a subscription only title, when only a couple of games with much larger player bases that it could hope to draw can manage it.
Perhaps a smaller company with lower revenue expectations willing to run what would be a very niche title with limited market appeal might feel it worthwhile. How many MMORPG companies are like that, though.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
But I can see a revival as a useful thing for DBG.
DBG has recently invested in assembling a new development team. DBG's current staff is all in maintenance mode, with little recent experience in game development. It may be plausible that DBG could use resurrecting an old project, one with known problems, and use this to 'train' a new core of developers in how DBG wants to develop future games. Essentially, they could use a retired product like Vanguard (or Free Realms) as a training ground to build a team to work the the way they want. Such a project could possibly ramp up a new team in a short time using a lot of existing assets (code, art, music, etc.).
I don't know that DBG would actually do this, however. I feel that there's just not enough money in a Vanguard revival to justify the development expenses. It makes more sense to me for DBG to look to sell off their retired IPs than revive them. That approach would give them short term income without incurring longer term liabilities, and that seems to fit their business strategy perfectly.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
It could also be counter-productive, though. If it was that easy to simply pick up a game and make an example of it, then I'm sure someone would have picked up the rights to Project Copernicus by now and we'd have played it and grown tired of it
Sometimes it's more work to pick up a project than just kill it.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee